Didn't this already get resolved by allowing students and adult Sikhs to wear kirpans anywhere they want? I thought the kirpan was "the sword of God"? Also, did this guy get named a Khalsa, or is he using Khalsa as his last name?

steve-0:Didn't this already get resolved by allowing students and adult Sikhs to wear kirpans anywhere they want? I thought the kirpan was "the sword of God"? Also, did this guy get named a Khalsa, or is he using Khalsa as his last name?

steve-0:Didn't this already get resolved by allowing students and adult Sikhs to wear kirpans anywhere they want? I thought the kirpan was "the sword of God"? Also, did this guy get named a Khalsa, or is he using Khalsa as his last name?

Sikh are required (by tradition / religion) to carry a Kirpan at all times. It is a ceremonial sword or dagger.

from teh intrawebs:To Sikhs the Kirpan is religiously symbolic of their spirituality and the constant struggle of good and morality over the forces of evil and injustice, both on a individual as well as social level. The usage of the Kirpan in this religious context is clearly indicated in the Sikh holy scriptures (Sri Guru Granth Sahib) and wearing it is meant to inspire a Sikh in their daily life;

steve-0:Didn't this already get resolved by allowing students and adult Sikhs to wear kirpans anywhere they want? I thought the kirpan was "the sword of God"? Also, did this guy get named a Khalsa, or is he using Khalsa as his last name?

This has "religious fanatic" all over it, and not in the good way.

Yeah, here in California Sikh kids are indeed allowed to wear a kirpan on campus. If one tries to replace it with a rifle and high capacity magazine "because religion!!!" it would not end well. Kid would probably be shot by one of the kids carrying illegally, of which there are plenty in some areas.

Sikh are required (by tradition / religion) to carry a Kirpan at all times. It is a ceremonial sword or dagger.

from teh intrawebs:To Sikhs the Kirpan is religiously symbolic of their spirituality and the constant struggle of good and morality over the forces of evil and injustice, both on a individual as well as social level. The usage of the Kirpan in this religious context is clearly indicated in the Sikh holy scriptures (Sri Guru Granth Sahib) and wearing it is meant to inspire a Sikh in their daily life;

This guy is just a dickwad who wants to carry an AR-15 and thinks he found a religious loophole.

The lesson I draw from this is that NO laws in a secular country should have religious exceptions except Rastafarians mon.

This is perfect. He's just showing that if you use religion as an exception then you open legal loopholes that you can drive a tank through. Literally. "My religion requires that I be in a travelling fortress."

Consider the increase in rates of violent crime that would occur were California residents not barred from purchasing rifles with thumbhole stocks.

How do threaded barrels, pistol grips and collapsing stocks enganger public safety?

You know, I've been studying that post. Is it a cleverly crafted troll? Because the best ones are subtle and this one is so subtle you can't be certain of the intent. It is also short and to the point. Most troll attempts fail because they go on too long and by doing so typically reveal some aspect of the troller's platform. On the other hand, dimensio could be sincere in his belief that the type of stock determines some sort of overall quality of the firearm and since I know many people that believe the same thing, I could also simply take him at his word.

Consider the increase in rates of violent crime that would occur were California residents not barred from purchasing rifles with thumbhole stocks.

How do threaded barrels, pistol grips and collapsing stocks enganger public safety?

You know, I've been studying that post. Is it a cleverly crafted troll? Because the best ones are subtle and this one is so subtle you can't be certain of the intent. It is also short and to the point. Most troll attempts fail because they go on too long and by doing so typically reveal some aspect of the troller's platform. On the other hand, dimensio could be sincere in his belief that the type of stock determines some sort of overall quality of the firearm and since I know many people that believe the same thing, I could also simply take him at his word.

I don't know, I guess I'm on the fence on this one.

In fact, I am attempting to practice a human skill known as "sarcasm", where false statements are issued with a specific inflection or wording to make obvious the fact that the speaker or writer actually holds a position contrary to those expressed in the stated or written words. Unfortunately, I have yet to master this methodology.

Joe Blowme:It would oppress everyone who lives under the protection of the US constitution, regardless of religion or lack there of

I don't know if I agree with you about that, but I do think we can agree that "technical" gun bans are not the way to go. I am FAR more concerned about who gets their hands on guns, and how, than I am about what kind of guns they get their hands on.I know people I would trust with a tommy-gun in a nursery school - and people I wouldn't trust with a .22 Derringer in a biker bar.

I think that this medium prevents the effective use of sarcasm unless the length of the post allows it to border on satire or proceed on to parody. I know that there have been several international conferences which have attempted to provide the internet with a special font or other methodology to convey sarcasm effectively. If it weren't for the French, I think that the Lausanne Manifesto could have succeeded.

jso2897:Joe Blowme: It would oppress everyone who lives under the protection of the US constitution, regardless of religion or lack there of

I don't know if I agree with you about that, but I do think we can agree that "technical" gun bans are not the way to go. I am FAR more concerned about who gets their hands on guns, and how, than I am about what kind of guns they get their hands on.I know people I would trust with a tommy-gun in a nursery school - and people I wouldn't trust with a .22 Derringer in a biker bar.

I would thin that if the goal is to reduce death there are bigger holes in teh damn to fix first, this leads me to believe it is not really about the children or saving lives because we continue to ignore the larger killers of innocent people in favor of doing feel good measures that only affect law abiding citizens and further infringe on the 2nd. If we dont need more than a 10 round clip why to wwe need a vehicle that can go over the speed limit when speed kills way more that guns? Or drunk driving, why does everyone not have a breath start in their car? WONT SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!!??!

Not a Sikh, but I have had extended conversations with a few of them about the need to carry their kirpan - their ceremonial knife.

The general consensus is that they are symbolic only - many kirpans are actually glued into their scabbard, or welded, or are so small as to be completely useless in combat. Instead, they're meant to be a physical reminder of the commandment that you must actively prevent violence being done to others, and you may need to use violence to ensure that happens. It's not as backwards as it sounds, basically it only authorizes violence in the cases where you're protecting others (or yourselves) and another party has already become violent.

There's also deeper stuff having to do with mental fortitude to defend against injustice and strike down lies, and other non-physical aspects, sort of like a mentally-armed political activist. By itself though, doesn't represent a real weapon, only a willingness to implement those ideals. It's interesting because even in the US, they're allowed to - for example - fly with their kirpans, though there are ~some~ restrictions, and douchebag TSA agents still reserve the right to confiscate them.

There's apparently nothing in the religion that indicates they need to be actually literally armed with weapons capable of death of others at all times.

quietwalker:Not a Sikh, but I have had extended conversations with a few of them about the need to carry their kirpan - their ceremonial knife.

The general consensus is that they are symbolic only - many kirpans are actually glued into their scabbard, or welded, or are so small as to be completely useless in combat. Instead, they're meant to be a physical reminder of the commandment that you must actively prevent violence being done to others, and you may need to use violence to ensure that happens. It's not as backwards as it sounds, basically it only authorizes violence in the cases where you're protecting others (or yourselves) and another party has already become violent.

There's also deeper stuff having to do with mental fortitude to defend against injustice and strike down lies, and other non-physical aspects, sort of like a mentally-armed political activist. By itself though, doesn't represent a real weapon, only a willingness to implement those ideals. It's interesting because even in the US, they're allowed to - for example - fly with their kirpans, though there are ~some~ restrictions, and douchebag TSA agents still reserve the right to confiscate them.

There's apparently nothing in the religion that indicates they need to be actually literally armed with weapons capable of death of others at all times.

No need for the religion to state it, the constitution does it for them. Its some where between the 1st and 3rd amendments

Joe Blowme:jso2897: Joe Blowme: It would oppress everyone who lives under the protection of the US constitution, regardless of religion or lack there of

I don't know if I agree with you about that, but I do think we can agree that "technical" gun bans are not the way to go. I am FAR more concerned about who gets their hands on guns, and how, than I am about what kind of guns they get their hands on.I know people I would trust with a tommy-gun in a nursery school - and people I wouldn't trust with a .22 Derringer in a biker bar.

I would thin that if the goal is to reduce death there are bigger holes in teh damn to fix first, this leads me to believe it is not really about the children or saving lives because we continue to ignore the larger killers of innocent people in favor of doing feel good measures that only affect law abiding citizens and further infringe on the 2nd. If we dont need more than a 10 round clip why to wwe need a vehicle that can go over the speed limit when speed kills way more that guns? Or drunk driving, why does everyone not have a breath start in their car? WONT SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!!??!

Well, you need to support your paradigm that ALL gun control is bad, and that only bad, unreasonable people support any form of it - so you will only dialogue with or accept as legitimate "gun control advocates" of the "Diane Feinstein" mold, and simply refuse to talk to, or even acknowledge the existence of the far more numerous advocates of a reasonable approach, such as myself. Of course, I do suspect that there is really no form of any kind of gun control that you would ever accept as legitimate, because after all other arguments are exhausted, you still have the "slippery - slope" argument, which, of course, ANYBODY can always use for ANYTHING.

jso2897:Joe Blowme: jso2897: Joe Blowme: It would oppress everyone who lives under the protection of the US constitution, regardless of religion or lack there of

I don't know if I agree with you about that, but I do think we can agree that "technical" gun bans are not the way to go. I am FAR more concerned about who gets their hands on guns, and how, than I am about what kind of guns they get their hands on.I know people I would trust with a tommy-gun in a nursery school - and people I wouldn't trust with a .22 Derringer in a biker bar.

I would thin that if the goal is to reduce death there are bigger holes in teh damn to fix first, this leads me to believe it is not really about the children or saving lives because we continue to ignore the larger killers of innocent people in favor of doing feel good measures that only affect law abiding citizens and further infringe on the 2nd. If we dont need more than a 10 round clip why to wwe need a vehicle that can go over the speed limit when speed kills way more that guns? Or drunk driving, why does everyone not have a breath start in their car? WONT SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN?!!??!

Well, you need to support your paradigm that ALL gun control is bad, and that only bad, unreasonable people support any form of it - so you will only dialogue with or accept as legitimate "gun control advocates" of the "Diane Feinstein" mold, and simply refuse to talk to, or even acknowledge the existence of the far more numerous advocates of a reasonable approach, such as myself. Of course, I do suspect that there is really no form of any kind of gun control that you would ever accept as legitimate, because after all other arguments are exhausted, you still have the "slippery - slope" argument, which, of course, ANYBODY can always use for ANYTHING.

But what is the purpose of gun controll? I've been told its about protecting the innocent victims of gun violence but there are worse things out there killing our children. Its like focusing on that splinter in your hand and ignoring the brains leaking out your ear because you hate splinters so much. I guess we just have to agree to disagree.

legion_of_doo:SpectroBoy: Marine1: That's kind of how I see it. I could be in the dark on this, but the Sikhs I've met and heard of don't sound like the types to go off the deep end.All Sikhs I have ever met have been the nicest, kindest people you could ever meet. To me they appear to be one of the few religions that try to live up to the marketing material.And the guy in the article is just an asshat who happens to claim to be a sikh.there have been Sikh extremists & terrorists, honor killings, and the like.it wouldn't be correct to assume any group doesn't include a lunatic side.

Very true, although in my experience Sikhs tend to have a higher percentage of the good ones than other religions.FTFA: "Khalsa said if assault weapons were legalized in the state, the loss of life in mass shootings, like the one in Wisconsin, could be minimized."